June 9, 2023
City of Belmont City Council
1 Twin Pines Lane
Belmont, CA 94002
Via email to City Clerk: cclerk@belmont.gov
Subject: Research and Development Ordinance City Council Review June 13, 2023
Dear Mayor Mates and Members of the City Council,
The Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter’s Sustainable Land Use Committee (SLU) advocates on land use issues in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties. In that role, we have spent a lot of time researching the upsurge of Life Science / Biotech buildings and campuses in San Mateo County and strongly recommend that all cities on the Peninsula, including Belmont, prohibit the construction of Biosafety level labs BSL-3 and BSL-4.
We were disappointed that the only concern about these types of facilities in Belmont was the parking ratio. A Life Science facility is not your typical office development. It may include offices, but its core is the biotech laboratory which researches a wide array of health issues from the common cold to highly infectious diseases. Therefore, they come with a hightened level of health risk. They are also one of the most environmentally unsustainable building uses that are being proposed on the Peninsula.
We recently reviewed a letter sent to you on May 25 by Gary and Debbie Baldocchi (copy below) which thoroughly covers all of the issues we have about biotech development on the Peninsula, and we strongly recommend that you reread that letter and seriously consider the arguements and warnings.
It is time for Belmont to enact a stringent Biosafety ordinance that regulates biotech developments and prohibits BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs. San Carlos, Millbrae and other cities are in the process of doing that right now so it's time for Belmont to catch up.
Respectfully yours,
Gita Dev, FAIA, Co-Chair
Sustainable Land Use Committee
Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter
Cc: James Eggers, Executive Director, Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter
Gladwyn d’Souza, Conservation Chair, Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter
Belmont City Planning Commission
Copy of Baldocchi May 25 letter:
May 25, 2023
Dear Mayor Mates, Vice Mayor Davina Hurt, and Council Members McCune, Latimerio, and Pang-Maganaris,
We respectfully request that you consider supplementing the proposed Research and Development Ordinance Amendment to include detailed Biosafety laboratory guidelines that will minimize the risks to public health and safety and mitigate the environmental impacts caused by Biosafety labs’ (BSL) extreme energy use and water consumption. Local ordinances are needed to provide guidelines for the research of potentially lethal pathogens which could have catastrophic consequences in the event of a lab accident caused by human error, natural disasters, prolonged drought, earthquakes, flooding, power grid overload or rolling black outs.
We are concerned that the proposed amended ordinance does not address biosafety levels, biohazards, or biosecurity. It does not provide any guidelines for high- containment biosafety labs (BSL 3), such as minimum set-backs from residential and sensitive users, siting in FEMA flood zones or areas prone to flooding or the city’s emergency response plan in the event of a loss of containment or lab accident. In addition, a portion of the proposed amendment seems to diminish some of the existing ordinance’s public safety protections related to offensive odors, dust, noise, bright lights, vibration and storage of hazardous materials or products. These are characteristics of high-containment biosafety labs which have been described as “noxious neighbors” by other jurisdictions.
Please join San Carlos, Redwood City, Berkeley and many other cities in enacting a specific Biosafety ordinance that will regulate biosafety levels. We ask that you prohibit high-containment biosafety labs (BSL 3 and 4). (There are no maximum containment BSL-4 labs in California.)
Thank you very much for considering our detailed letter, supporting documentation, research and links. We summarize the key points from our letter here:
- here is insufficient local oversight and regulation of private, high-containment biosafety labs;
- Privately operated biosafety labs lack transparency and public accountability. They are not required to disclose the biosafety levels on site or the types of pathogens being researched in the absence of local ordinances;
- here are critical weaknesses and gaps in the federal oversight of high-containment labs;
- Enhanced pandemic pathogen research conducted in BSL-3 labs may pose catastrophic risks to public and environmental health and safety;
- Multiple cities prohibit BSL-3 labs, vivaria and certain types of animal research near residential zoning and environmentally sensitive areas;
- Cities should enact a stringent Biosafety ordinance that regulates biohazards and prohibits BSL-3 and 4 labs (Conditional Use permits for high-containment labs are inadequate due to cities’ lack of expertise, lack of Biosafety committees and limited financial resources to conduct the necessary oversight);
- If a city allows BSL-3 labs, it should require all developers and biosafety lab tenants to comply with strict guidelines similar to those enacted by Cambridge, MA and strictly limit the amount of square footage dedicated to BSL-3 labs;
- High-containment labs should not be sited within 1,500 feet of residences, sensitive receptors and the bayfront;
- Scientists and researchers have identified multiple instances of lab accidents that have resulted in serious and sometimes lethal disease transmission;
- Biolabs use 5-10 times the amount of energy as other office uses and require the use of natural gas or other types of tanked flammable gases. Millions of square feet of new biolab developments will strain our overtaxed energy grid, increase the risk of rolling blackouts and may contribute to sustained power outages for residents and members of the public;
- They are often unable to comply with REACH codes and Climate Mitigation Adaption plans, including local and state prohibitions on natural gas use. They often cannot use rooftop solar panels due to tall exhaust stacks:
- They use 4-5 time more water than other uses, cannot use recycled water (except for landscaping) and will strain or deplete county water storage capacity;
- High-containment labs and subterranean parking structures should not be permitted in FEMA flood zones, areas prone to flooding or in the direct path of sea level rise;
- Fire departments and first responders may choose not to enter BSL-3 labs in the event of a fire or emergency due to the risks of exposure to potentially lethal pathogens. Cities should require all Life Science developers and tenants to disclose the biosafety levels and areas where BSL labs are located on site to protect first responders and a detailed emergency response plan;
- Reject developers’ strategies and tactics that have allowed them to circumvent stringent environmental review and public hearings in order to site BSL-3 labs in densely populated residential areas. Cities should require new Environmental Impact Reports for each development or the later addition of a BSL-3 lab tenant;
- Developers are withdrawing or decreasing community benefits—cities should establish a legal mechanism to require developers to provide the benefits they proposed.
We greatly appreciate your thoughtful consideration of these critical public health and environmental safety issues.
Sincerely,
Debbie and Gary Baldocchi